Syria and equation of freedom and liberation

It is not hidden from the observer of the recent developments which our Arab countries are witnessing in this critical stage of its history that each country has its own way to express its pains and hopes and the presence of common factors in the Arabic status does not exclude the privacy of each country.

Of course, this introduction does not mean to use it as a slogan in the face of those who demand reformation in order to swallow their demands under the pretext that countries are not like Tunisia, Egypt, or Libya, as some regimes did before, such as the previous regime in Egypt before its collapse when more than a person in charge declared that Egypt is not like Tunisia and expecting that the events of Tunisia would move to Egypt is "nonsense" according to the statement of the former foreign minister "Ahmad Abu Al Ghait"!

The privacy of Syria which I mean here is represented in the current Syrian scene after the rising protests which was focused in Dir`ah Governorate in the south of Syria then moved to other areas including the capital and dozens fell between dead and wounded.

Again, we recall the arguments about the equation that prevailed in the fifties and in the sixties in the Arab countries which was: which of the two has priority: freedom or liberation? Meaning: Can priority be given to the release of freedom and regulations and formation of parties or for backing the battle of liberation and resisting the foreign occupation because there is no sound should be louder than the sound of the battle?

This argument in the past decades was in favor of the second option which people considered necessary in that time and circumstances but it cost the citizens much of their freedom and limited their ability or desire in participation in the public work.

People in general were interested in their own business and left the administration of the state for the only governing party either to abstain from participation in politics or avoiding the hazards that encircled politics such as plots, detention, and exercising of repression and suppression.

However, it was not logical after the rapid changes which the world in general and the Arab world in particular are witnessing after the revolution of Tunisia and Egypt that Syria continues its previous politics and keeps away from the current events, especially while its neighbor (the Zionist entity) that occupies part of it exercises the game of democracy inside Israel at a broader scale, without affecting negatively its management of its multiple files, first and foremost the conflict with the Arabs!

On the contrary, we saw Israel using the game of balances and the "exchange of chairs" among its extremist right-wing parties in order to press the Arab negotiating party on one hand, and on the Arab fighting party on the other in order to extract concessions from the first, and to intimidate and terrify the second!

The questions arise are: why does not Syria benefit from these current situations in establishing freedom, launching regulations and formations which allow the community to express itself and to strengthen its cohesion against external threats? Why do the Arabs alone defer their political and economic issues until the battle with the occupier ends? Are not the Arab peoples capable of fighting simultaneous battles in more than one direction? Is it possible to unite against external threats, whereas the internal infrastructure is fragile and non-coherent?!

It was difficult for Syria -as the Syrian president himself confessed in his speech before the Parliament that was delivered on Wednesday, March 30- to continue ignoring the needs of the people, or surpass their sufferings, however he noted that there are foreign parties have worked to exploit these legitimate demands and that some demonstrators were cheated by "few conspiring people" who mixed between sedition and reform, and the daily needs.

On the other hand, some Syrians considered the address of "Bashar" was not at the level of the event, and they expected to listen to a speech that includes reforms and not studies and discussions of Al Baath Party.

Whatever the case is, it is obvious that the time is besieging the Syrian regime -as well as other Arab regimes- and the delay in the reform steps will open the door for foreign conspiracies which we should admit that they have never stopped and shall not stop one day, but it must not serve as a pretext for the continued repression of opposition and refusing to interact with people's aspirations and hopes.

It is urgent to open a new page with all the national forces, cancel the emergency law, allow the multi-media platforms and Political Rights, and accountability of the corrupt and the wasters of public money who violated the rights of the people for decades without fear of law and accountability!

It is no longer acceptable nor feasible to demand that the masses of belonging and defending a homeland in which they live as strangers and even persecuted. Therefore, duties which the masses are asked to fulfill are against the rights which they should take. The ruling regime in any country with its authority, power, and law, is the responsible for setting the mutual relationship between the homeland and citizens.

Facing the enemy and standing firm against foreign threats will not be achieved if it was based on a solid basis of internal cohesion that is built on unity, mutual goals, and effective development which achieve the independence of political decisions and preserve the rights of citizens as well as the rights of the country altogether without breaking or violating the rights of one of them in favor of the other.